Population and Development

Book reviewed in this article: Fertility and Mortality: Theory, Methodology and Empirical Issues. Edited by K. Mahadevan with P.J. Reddy and D.A. Naidu Sex Roles, Population and Development in West Africa. Edited by Christine Oppong Population and Development Projects in Africa. Edited by John I. Clarke, Mustafa Khogali and Leszek A. Kosinski for International Geographical Union, Commission on Population Geography     

Participation, Authority, and Distributive Equity in East Timorese Development

The anthropology of development seeks to understand the complex encounter between international and national development regimes and local patterns of livelihood and being. As science and development move objects, at once material and discursive, through the networks of the social to reach “impoverished” others, local groups reach out to development actors to evaluate and appropriate their resources and accept or redirect those efforts. In a political interplay of disciplinary measures and localizing translations, development projects are re-invented, or aspects thereof refused, just as development actors strain to keep projects on track. With input from science and technology studies, this article explores the participatory, authoritative, and distributive dimensions to agricultural development in East Timor. Across four cases studies—a dairy, a greenhouse, a seed development program, and a permanent farming initiative—the politics of projects are compared and discussed within the broader context of colonial and postcolonial development. The article is based on a total of 1 year of fieldwork conducted in 2003, 2008, and 2009.     

What Determines Trust in Information About Food-Related Risks? Underlying Psychological Constructs

Trust in risk information about food related-hazards may be an important determinant of public reactions to risk information. One of the central questions addressed by the risk communication literature is why some individuals and organizations are trusted as sources of risk information and others are not. Industry and government often lack public trust, whereas other sources (for example, consumer organizations, the quality media, medical doctors) are highly trusted. Problematically, previous surveys and questionnaire studies have utilized questions generated by the investigators themselves to assess public perceptions of trust in different sources. Furthermore, no account of the hazard domain was made. In the first study reported here, semistructured interviewing was used to elicit underpinning constructs determining trust and distrust in different sources providing food-related risk information ( n = 35). In the second study, the repertory grid method was used to elicit the terminology that respondents use to distinguish between different potential food-related information sources ( n = 35), the data being submitted to generalised Procrustes analysis. The results of the two studies were combined and validated in survey research ( n = 888) where factor analysis indicated that knowledge in itself does not lead to trust, but that trusted sources are seen to be characterised by multiple positive attributes. Contrary to previous research, complete freedom does not lead to trust—rather sources which possess moderate accountability are seen to be the most trusted.     

Methodological Approaches to Assessing Risk Perceptions Associated with Food-Related Hazards

The psychometric approach developed by Slovic and his co-workers has been effectively used to assess risk perceptions associated with different food-related hazards. However, further examination (using questionnaire data and partial correlation techniques) has indicated that technological hazards are highly differentiated from lifestyle hazards, in terms of both hazard control and knowledge about the hazard. Optimistic bias was also seen to vary between hazards. Further research has focused on a particular hazard, genetic engineering. Risk perceptions associated with genetic engineering are underpinned by ethical concern and questions relating to perceived need for the technology, as well as perceptions of risk or harm. However, increasing the specificity of hazard stimuli was found to alter the factor structure of underlying risk perceptions. The utility of preference mapping procedures in determining individual differences in trust in risk regulators is also discussed.     

Encyclopaedic Desire: A Response to Gates

“We Spend Our Years as a Tale That Is Told”: Oral Historical Narrative in a South African Chiefdom by Isabel Hofmeyr. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann; Johannesburg: Witwatersrand University Press; London: James Currey, 1994.

Liquor and Labour in Southern Africa, edited by Jonathan Crush and Charles Ambler. Athens: Ohio University Press; and Pietermaritzburg: University of Natal Press, 1992.

Politics and performance: Theatre, Poetry, and Song on Southern Africa, edited by Liz Gunner, Johannesburg: Witwatersrand University Press, 1994.

In the Wake of the Affluent Society: An Exploration of Post‐Development by Serge Latouche; translated and introduced by Martin O'Connor &; Rosemary Arnoux; London: Zed, 1993.     

Attitudes towards reproductive technologies for humans

Abstract

The aim of this exploratory study was to measure attitudes towards various applications of real and hypothetical reproductive technologies for humans, including prenatal gender selection. A total of 121 undergraduate university students completed a questionnaire measuring knowledge, interest, trust, risks and benefits, and attitudes towards reproductive technologies for humans. An exploratory factor analysis showed that participants rated the use of these technologies as unacceptable if it was for personal enhancement but acceptable for “medically useful” applications. Participants also reported not having a gender preference for their (hypothetical) unborn child, were they to use prenatal gender selection, an application very few approved of. Results failed to support a general desire to use prenatal gender selection or to hypothetically favour one gender over the other. Attitudes towards reproductive technologies cannot be simply summarised in a “pro or against” manner as they heavily depend on the context.